Cases 51 - 60 of 235
Freeman v. Collier et al
as 3:2022cv01620
Petitioner:
Lanchester Freeman
Respondent:
Bryan Collier and Texas Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Thompson v. Lumpkin
as 22-50490
Petitioner / Appellant:
Ronald Wayne Thompson
Respondent / Appellee:
Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division and Bryan Collier, Executive Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice
Ogden v. Lumpkin
as 5:2022cv00619
Petitioner:
Ray Ogden
Respondent:
Bryan Collier and Bobby Lumpkin-Director TDCJ-CID
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Brown v. Collier
as 3:2022cv01066
Petitioner:
Roy Earl Brown
Respondent:
Bryan Collier
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Irvin v. Annucci et al
as 1:2022cv04887
Petitioner:
Lature Irvin, Sr.
Respondent:
Anthony J. Annucci, Letitia James, Alvin Bragg and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Ramsey v. Collier
as 3:2022cv01363
Petitioner:
Elizabeth A Ramsey
Respondent:
Bryan Collier
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Thompson v. Collier
as 6:2022cv00471
Petitioner:
Ronald Wayne Thompson
Respondent:
Bryan Collier
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Brown v. Collier
as 3:2022cv01067
Petitioner:
Roy Earl Brown
Respondent:
Bryan Collier
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Brown v. Collier
as 3:2022cv01068
Petitioner:
Roy Earl Brown
Respondent:
Bryan Collier
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Brown v. Collier
as 3:2022cv01069
Petitioner:
Roy Earl Brown
Respondent:
Bryan Collier
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
